Holland-Taylor Movie Reviews

Alice is a compendium of missed opportunities. Woody conjures up all sorts of angles worth exploring then drops them.

The movie is worth seeing for the stunningly crisp cinematography, odd use of color (especially in Farrow and Hurt's bizarre apartment) and unerringly apt musical choices. Woody's deep feeling for jazz is the unbilled star here, and when a lush string orchestra with muted trumpet strikes up a silvery and sensitive chorus of "I Remember You" just before Alice awakes to a visitation from her long-dead lover (Baldwin) you get a palpable sense of the heroine's pent-up longings.

Joe Mantegna is terrific. He uses those sleepy, heavy-lidded eyes of his to superb effect; those eyes tell us more than Woody's sketchy script ever will.

The film's most electrifying sequence brings the great, underutilized actress Gwen Verdon out of the shadows to play Alice's boozy mom. We've seen this boozy mom archetype in Allen films before: Maureen O'Sullivan in Hannah, Elaine Stritch in September. But none of them brought the FIRE that seethes from Verdon. Verdon conveys such waste and degradation that I felt as if I were witness to something horribly private. And there lies the movie's greatest sin: we just get this one scene and no more. What happened? Was the loaded gun triangle of Farrow, Verdon and "the accomplished sister" Blythe Danner to hot for Woody to handle???

I didn't mind the whimsy of Alice. But there was a meatier, darker story here waiting to be told, and Allen backs away from telling it. Still, given how bad, coarse, loud, vulgar and passionless nearly all of Allen's post-Mia films have been, Alice looks more and more like a gift as time goes by.

In Wonderland? This is the story of a mid-life crisis Mia Farrow, who, as Alice, the wife of a rich designer, played by William Hurt, has given up her own career and spiritual impulses a long time ago.

She now devotes herself to the frenetic passivity of her glamorous but rather humdrum Park Avenue existence - a wonderland of health fads, plastic surgery, extramarital affairs, gossip, with over-expenditure on everything from cuddly toys to personal masseuses and physical fitness trainers.

Alice soon meets the mysterious Dr Yan, and is therby introduced to a yet another wonderland of magic drugs that enable her, by turns, to don the cloak of invisibility, summon up ghosts from the past, make anyone fall in love with her, and generally see through the lies and hypocrisy of her life.

Despite these rich ingredients, the central theme of the movie owes more to the dourness of Ibsen's "A Doll's House" than to the unrestrained fantasy of Lewis Carroll's work. Allen's Alice is in fact Nora, a faithful wife and, with the help of maids, and, with the help of babysitters, a devoted mother. Beneath the surface, however, she feels stifled and deeply unhappy.

Having examined her life with the help of Dr Yan, the catalyst to changing it is Joe, a sleazy, divorced sax player, who enflames her passions, triggers off her catholic guilt feelings, and has her frantically trying to find out what her life meant, means, and will mean. She rushes around seeking answers, discovering her husband with another woman, and finding out, after a short affair, that Joe still loves his ex-wife.

All this is very entertaining, but what follows is a disappointment.

Alice decides to leave her husband, go off to Calcutta, meet Mother Teresa, and basically turn over a whole new leaf, wiping the slate clean, and living the complete antithesis to her former life by devoting herself to the poor and turning her back on all her old comforts.

This is no doubt supposed to be a warm-hearted ending with Alice "finding herself as a woman and an individual" and acting out a few other cosy, well-worn cliches that have crawled off the couches of New York analysts.

But just as her former life was perhaps too shallow, material, and hypocritical, her new life is too profound, spiritual, and sincere. There is a coldness in the emotional amnesia with which she excludes her husband from her new life, and a fleshlessness in the spirituality with which she turns her back on all men...

The character of Joe shows a more welcome attitude to life, an attitude that embraces life with all its contradictions, obligations, nostalgias, and emotion.

If there is any emotional centre to this film, it is not to be found in the main character.

Alice starts harmlessly enough as we meet her, a dissatisfied NY housewife married to a wealthy banker. The fun starts when she goes to a Chinese doctor (played by a brilliant actor, whose name I cannot remember) and he gives her various remedies to her problems. This kind of plot could easily fall into caricature and cliche but miraculously doesn't. The cast play their parts subtly and honestly, and support the movie's delicate frame. Mia is enchanting as Alice (and I don't usually feel this way about her). This quiet film is one that stays with me. Each time I see it, I enjoy it more.

This movie had a good plot. The performances by Salvator Xuereb and Patrick Foy were absolutely superb as feuding IRA brothers. I could have done without James Brolin. He and his character were out of place and his acting, as usual, leaves you unmoved. It's a movie worth watching on a rainy day. It is especially worth watching for the poem at the end - very moving.

This movie has an interesting, if slightly used up, story line. The highlight is the performances by Salvator Xuereb and Patrick Foy. They were absolutely superb as feuding IRA brothers. I could have done without James Brolin. His character was out of place and his acting, as usual, leaves you unmoved. It's a movie worth watching on a rainy day. It is especially worth watching for the poem at the end - very moving.

I enjoyed this movie altho I found one of the principal actors a bit to affected to be believable.JAMES BROLIN does a fine job as a first time director as well as taking the lead role .PATRICK FOY does well as the reluctant hero and GARY COOK as the IRA head is well cast.The only problem I had was that it was a bit cliched but then it is getting more and more difficult to come up with and original idea no matter what the story.Watch out for the BILL MURPHY cameo.He plays paddy kelly an IRA activist with the fire of freedom burning in his belly.Stunning scene.

There's a reason you won't find an episode listing for this overpriced series of 4 tapes-- there are only two episodes per tape, and you will find few, if any, of your most fondly remembered favorites among the 8 shows duplicated for your enjoyment at the slowest VHS speed, EP, on narrow-hub spools so your VCR will take forever to rewind them.

The show's opening theme song's been overdubbed with the *closing* theme song , too.

A waste of money.

Though Tom Hanks seems to get the most recognition, Wendie Jo Sperber is the true show stopper of Bosom Buddies. She is incredibly, hilariously talented . She steals every scene and is totally beautiful and sexy while doing so. She deserves Hanks career. She is amazing in everything she's in.

Thinking it was an updated Big Chill-type flick with a spectacular cast, I looked hi and low for this movie so my wife & I could enjoy it. All I can say is what a complete waste of time and money - and nothing like the Big Chill! If this movie was one of the year's 10 best (LA Times), a recipient of 4 stars (NY Post, LA Times), brilliant, enchanting & exquisite (60 Second Preview), & finally Two Thumbs Up, than I must have no idea what a good movie is. This was one of most ridiculous films we've ever seen.

I don't live in a big market city and I do realize that some think I lead a sheltered life, but give me a break! What kind of characters are in this flop? Well, there was a gay guy that somehow was able to seduce a guy who wasn't gay. If fact, this confused guy had just slept with the gay guy's sister and she revealed how jealous she was of him because he always winds up taking her boyfriends. HUH? Then come to find out the sister of the gay guy had sexual feelings for him and even acted on those feelings.

There was an actress that had to 'act' as a baby seal at one point and a perform as a leopard to 'deal' with issues in her life.

The only thing the reviewers and I could agree upon is this sentence: 'Perhaps the world's most dysfunctional family.' And how.

If Henry Jaglom is 'the definitive Hollywood filmmaker,' and this film was 'his best yet,' I think we'll heed that advice and never watch another of his films. I'd rather be locked in a room and be subjected to 'Dumb & Dumber' for 108 straight hours than watch this 108 minutes again.

I like to read movie reviews in the newspaper, in magazines, and on the internet to find out about movies that I otherwise might never find out about. Over the years, this has led to many wonderful films that I otherwise never would have known about. So, when this movie was releaed, I read several reviews from critics, and I noticed that this movie had gotten quite a few very positive reviews. So I went to the theater and I saw it. Boy was I ever disappointed! This movie is nothing more than a bunch of people siting around talking. Now, if the characters and their conversations are interesting, then that can make for a fine movie. For example, I loved the movie "Smoke" with Harvey Keitel. That movie had lots of interesting characters with plenty of interesting things to say. But "Last Summer in the Hamptons" lacks those good things. The characters in this movie are boring, their conversations are boring, and their lives are boring. And what makes it even worse is that the characters are not aware of the fact that they are boring. Instead, they all think that they are just oh so important. Simply put, this movie is the very definiton of the phrase "artsy fartsy." I think that there must be some kind of a clause in movie critics' employment contracts that requires them to give this movie a positive review and a high rating. Or, perhaps the critics are just trying to pretend that they can see something that the ordinary "common man" cannot see. Well, whatever the reason, the critics are wrong about this one. This movie is boring and dull and the characters are pretentious and boring and dull. And the movie is bad and I didn't like it.

I rarely take the time to sit and write movie or book reviews, but having seen all these negative reviews for "Last Summer in the Hamptons" I feel compelled to speak my piece.

What is so powerful here is not the dysfunctionality of the family portrayed within, but what is at the core of this dysfunctionality: it is the inability of its members to walk away from its greatness, its fame within the highest circles of the artistic world. This movie is, in a way, a modern "Buddenbrooks", but it delves much more deeply into the reasons for the family's implosion. From the teenager who is pathologically rebellious because, as she explains to her cousins, it is the only way she can find to establish her independence from this great theatrical institution which is her family; to the brilliant director who, in order to create, has renounced, monk-like fashion, all sexual contact; to the most deeply studied pair of characters: the brother and sister pair who are so caught up in the web of their family, that their own sexual passions are trapped within the family, self-directed in an incestuous relationship.

This is the saga of a family which is admired, coveted, and idolized from outside, yet whose members are suffocating under the weight and tremendous magnet of its fame. It is a family which is the embodiment of Blake's sick rose.

This is a great movie, or a great play; it is a very powerful piece which will stay with you for a long time.

This edited version of the original (out-of-print) Secret Policeman's Other Ball is disappointing. Some of the choicest bits (including Pete Townshend's incredible acoustic of "Pinball Wizard") have been omitted.

There are still some good sketches ("Cha-cha-cha")and music (Sting, Phil Collins, Jeff Beck, Clapton), but overall it was a very disappointing experience. If you want to support Amnesty International, send them a check. If you want to see The Secret Policeman's Other Ball, find a rental or buy a used copy of the original.

The first, unaccountably legendary 'Secret Policeman's Ball' was in effect a showcase for the comic Old Guard - Monty Python, Peter Cook, Billy Connolly etc. - with only Rowan Atkinson's participation hinting at the new directions British comedy would take. This sequel is much more representative of the early 1980s, adding to the cast the likes of Victoria Wood, Jasper Carrott, Dame Edna Everage and the 'Not the Nine O'Clock News' team. The refusal of these performers to taint the dignity of a charity fundraiser (for Amnesty International) with humour or imagination results in another hour and a half of stale and tedious routines (Atkinson actually reprises the classical music mime from the first film). What's worse, the 'comedy' is far more frequently interrupted by an aging gaggle of musical hypocrites, most notably Phil Collins, a famous fundraiser for the ruling Tory Party, who, at the time of this concert, supported apartheid in South Africa, suppressed allegations of domestic police brutality and racism, and prevented enquiries into notorious miscarriages of justice (the Guildford Four, the Birmingham Six). The one truly funny moment, however, comes from a musical sequence, when Donovan appears and a heckler shrieks 'I thought you were dead!' Once again, the film is impenetrably lit, but I don't think we're missing anything.

O.K. HERE'S THE DEAL. THE VIDEO FOR SALE HERE IS IN FACT THE SECRET POLICEMAN'S OTHER BALL (SPOB) BY RHINO (1998, 88 MINUTES). THE ONE EVERYONE SEEMS TO BE LOOKING FOR IS THE SPOB BY MGM/UA (1982, 100 MINUTES). THE MGM/UA VERSION CONTAINS ALL OF THE RHINO SPOB BUT IS PRECEDED BY 12 MINUTES OF THE SECRET POLICEMAN'S BALL (SPB). THE ENTIRE SPB IS AVAILABLE FROM RHINO (1998, 90 MINUTES) HERE ON AMAZON. AND YES, IT DOES CONTAIN THE CHEESE SHOP AND SCHOOLMASTER SKITS.

They should have called it "Mouse Mouse Tales," or "Tales From Cinderella's Castle." It should NOT have been called "Cinderella 2." That hints towards a feature, and since so few people read about videos before buying them, it gives them the wrong idea. I researched this video before buying it, and new exactly what to expect. It really lowered my disappointment. I was still a bit disappointed, as I always will be knowing Disney could do so much better, but come on folks, how many direct to video sequels will it take before you realize that they are very RARELY going to be any good?!!! Lion King 2 was a wonderful exception, and Aladdin and the King of Thieves was pretty good, but you should know by now to go in expecting the worst, and hoping you'll be surprised...
Cinderella 2 consists of 3 simple stories. They are told by Cinderella's Mice, who are writing a storybook so the Fairy Godmother and Cinderella will have something NEW to read to them. The first tale is about Cinderella struggling to do things right in the castle, in preparation for a ball, and finally realizing she must do things "her" way. The Second story is about Jaq the mouse making a wish to be a human so that he can be more helpful to Cinderella. Of course, by the end of the story he learns, in a rather silly way, that he's better off being a mouse. In the third story, Cinderella plays matchmaker for her apparently not so bad stepsister Anastasia. Anastasia has fallen in love with the neighborhood baker, and he with her. It's probably the best story, but in the sad tradition of Shrek and OTHER films, in teaching its moral it also teaches that unattractive people belong with unattractive people, and beautiful people with beautiful people...grrr...Oh, and Lucifer the cat makes a deal with the mice to help him win the heart of PomPom, the palace cat. Naturally, that doesn't work out.
The animation is below par, probably even compared to some of the Disney animated TV series. The music is atrocious. It's not good and it doesn't fit! There are a few extras, NONE worth mentioning, except for a clever little game. But once again, no video prize at the end! Overall, the film is actually pretty cute, though it would be MUCH cuter if it didn't have those horrible songs! It all seems more like watching a Cinderella TV series though. This is probably the sort of stuff people were expecting on the House of Mouse DVD that came out for Christmas that everyone hated so much. If these short stories had been on THAT DVD, it probably would have recieved much better reviews than simply having the Disney characters as window dressing and Mickey and the gang as the stars of the shorts. The bottom line is people are expecting the wrong thing from this film, because of the title probably. But hey, who would want to see a REAL Cinderella sequel? I'd be happier leaving it with the "happily ever after" ending. Buy this if you are a fan of the Mice from Cinderella. Heck, it's mainly about them. It's pretty corny, but it's cute. The mice are probably the only voices that sound the same, but they DO sound the same, so that's nice at least. By the way, didn't Lucifer the cat die in the original? And what happened to the horse? It worries me that he's the only one who didn't make it into the sequel...did he and the Crocodile from Peter Pan quit the Disney Studios to pursue some other career, or did they meet an untimely demise? Hope we see them again, at least on House of Mouse...PS: If you're hoping to see Cinderella have a confrontation with the Wicked Stepmother as I was, such as we saw in Ever After, forget it. Sadly, Cinderella hides behind buildings every time she sees her Stepmother in the village. But as I said, overall it's worth getting if you like the mice and just want something cute. Three cutesy stories, not one big movie type sequel.

I have never had many expectations for Disney's collection of direct to video sequels, and this movie is no exception. That is if your a twenty-five year old father of four, who would rather be watching Bruce Willis or Stallone blow stuff up. This movie is a great kids flick, mine watch it all the time.

The premise is that Cinderella's little mice friends and her fairy godmother conspire together to surpise her with a collection of short stories in a book they made for Cinderella. The movie is basically a collection of charming flashback storylines filled with alittle beebop music my preschool age kids enjoy dancing to. The story lines are decent and entertaining enough to hold parents attention for say the first hundred times. It's worth the money, and has been a strong pick in our Disney collection.

There are quite a few movies I have watched with my toddler and had to put them away until she got older because they had scary parts that gave her nightmares. This is a collection of stories after Cinderella moves into the castle and I don't have to skip any bad parts. It's also a way to get my daughter's favorite princess on DVD until the original comes out of the vault! Highly recommend for cute stories and happy music.

They should have called it "Mouse Mouse Tales," or "Tales From Cinderella's Castle." It should NOT have been called "Cinderella 2." That hints towards a feature, and since so few people read about videos before buying them, it gives them the wrong idea. I researched this video before buying it, and new exactly what to expect. It really lowered my disappointment. I was still a bit disappointed, as I always will be knowing Disney could do so much better, but come on folks, how many direct to video sequels will it take before you realize that they are very RARELY going to be any good?!!! Lion King 2 was a wonderful exception, and Aladdin and the King of Thieves was pretty good, but you should know by now to go in expecting the worst, and hoping you'll be surprised...
Cinderella 2 consists of 3 simple stories. They are told by Cinderella's Mice, who are writing a storybook so the Fairy Godmother and Cinderella will have something NEW to read to them. The first tale is about Cinderella struggling to do things right in the castle, in preparation for a ball, and finally realizing she must do things "her" way. The Second story is about Jaq the mouse making a wish to be a human so that he can be more helpful to Cinderella. Of course, by the end of the story he learns, in a rather silly way, that he's better off being a mouse. In the third story, Cinderella plays matchmaker for her apparently not so bad stepsister Anastasia. Anastasia has fallen in love with the neighborhood baker, and he with her. It's probably the best story, but in the sad tradition of Shrek and OTHER films, in teaching its moral it also teaches that unattractive people belong with unattractive people, and beautiful people with beautiful people...grrr...Oh, and Lucifer the cat makes a deal with the mice to help him win the heart of PomPom, the palace cat. Naturally, that doesn't work out.
The animation is below par, probably even compared to some of the Disney animated TV series. The music is atrocious. It's not good and it doesn't fit! There are a few extras, NONE worth mentioning, except for a clever little game. But once again, no video prize at the end! Overall, the film is actually pretty cute, though it would be MUCH cuter if it didn't have those horrible songs! It all seems more like watching a Cinderella TV series though. This is probably the sort of stuff people were expecting on the House of Mouse DVD that came out for Christmas that everyone hated so much. If these short stories had been on THAT DVD, it probably would have recieved much better reviews than simply having the Disney characters as window dressing and Mickey and the gang as the stars of the shorts. The bottom line is people are expecting the wrong thing from this film, because of the title probably. But hey, who would want to see a REAL Cinderella sequel? I'd be happier leaving it with the "happily ever after" ending. Buy this if you are a fan of the Mice from Cinderella. Heck, it's mainly about them. It's pretty corny, but it's cute. The mice are probably the only voices that sound the same, but they DO sound the same, so that's nice at least. By the way, didn't Lucifer the cat die in the original? And what happened to the horse? It worries me that he's the only one who didn't make it into the sequel...did he and the Crocodile from Peter Pan quit the Disney Studios to pursue some other career, or did they meet an untimely demise? Hope we see them again, at least on House of Mouse...PS: If you're hoping to see Cinderella have a confrontation with the Wicked Stepmother as I was, such as we saw in Ever After, forget it. Sadly, Cinderella hides behind buildings every time she sees her Stepmother in the village. But as I said, overall it's worth getting if you like the mice and just want something cute. Three cutesy stories, not one big movie type sequel.

I have never had many expectations for Disney's collection of direct to video sequels, and this movie is no exception. That is if your a twenty-five year old father of four, who would rather be watching Bruce Willis or Stallone blow stuff up. This movie is a great kids flick, mine watch it all the time.

The premise is that Cinderella's little mice friends and her fairy godmother conspire together to surpise her with a collection of short stories in a book they made for Cinderella. The movie is basically a collection of charming flashback storylines filled with alittle beebop music my preschool age kids enjoy dancing to. The story lines are decent and entertaining enough to hold parents attention for say the first hundred times. It's worth the money, and has been a strong pick in our Disney collection.

There are quite a few movies I have watched with my toddler and had to put them away until she got older because they had scary parts that gave her nightmares. This is a collection of stories after Cinderella moves into the castle and I don't have to skip any bad parts. It's also a way to get my daughter's favorite princess on DVD until the original comes out of the vault! Highly recommend for cute stories and happy music.

I cannot emphasize how much I hated this movie. I knew it would be bad; so why did I watch it?! Sometimes I just have to find movies that I can put on my all-time worst list. This is an abjectly painful account of a pint-sized witness to a crime, who will give the police information in exchange for partnership with Burt Reynolds as a diminutive law enforcer. T.V.'s Webster has nothing on this kid in terms of "I'm-so-annoyingly-in-your-face-that-I'm-cute" syndrome. All the way through this paralyzingly awful movie we're subjected to lower-than-low juvenile humor; the nadir being when the kid and Reynolds play "crossing swords" with their urine over a toilet. God save us.

There is not one second of this film that is defensible from an artistic point of view. The story (an old grizzled cop reluctantly teams up with a precocious kid to solve a case) contains not an ounce of originality, yet there is genuine charm! Reynolds is clearly tired, frustrated, and has that look in his eye like he wants to murder his agent, but he had my attention. Why? I suppose a team of scientists working 'round the clock could never discover its strange appeal, yet I will not deny its effect. And the scene at the end when it is revealed that they share the same style of boots? Shamelessly sappy and cornball, yet I'll be damned if I didn't stand up and cheer.

Well there has never been a finer movie ever made! The quality of scenes like the Twinkie fight of when Devon gets his head in the toilet are simply some of the most classic ever. And Burt Reynolds? Ooh, easily his best work to date. I love the grandma and especially Reynolds lump milk and his extremly "good aim"!

WHY WOULD TWO L.A. LAW CAST MEMBERS STAR IN A MOVIE AS THIS? THIS IS DREADFUL & A WASTE OF TIME. EVEN BEN STEIN & JIMMY KIMMEL KNOW ABOUT THIS.

I have searched high and low to buy this movie and wish it was cheaper so I could. I love it though. It will keep you suspecting and laughing forever. As soon as the price drops, it's mine!